The case, which involved a plan to demolish a largely minority neighborhood in Mount Holly, N.J. and build newer, more expensive housing in its place and raised the question of whether a party can establish a discriminatory housing practice under the Act by showing that minorities have been disproportionately affected (the “disparate impact” test), had been scheduled for argument before the Court on Dec. 4.

The [disparate impact] approach had been approved by all nine federal appeals courts to consider the question, and HUD even issued a regulation in January interpreting the Fair Housing Act as allowing claims of disparate racial impact. But many expected that the Roberts Court would be inclined to roll all this progress back, given its hostility to the Voting Rights Act, affirmative action, and other means for rooting out racial discrimination.